First, undo what we have. Then decide what's next. I am not for a first-party system. The first question is whether we want to keep what we already have. Only after that do we decide, separately and in public, whether Cabot wants its own system under public oversight.

 

Q: What are Flock cameras, and what's happening with them in Cabot right now?

A: They are automated license plate readers run by a private, out-of-state company on a subscription. Right now Cabot's cameras are covered and suspended while the city decides their future.

 

Q: What is your position, in one sentence?

A: First, undo what we have. Then decide what's next. I am not for a first-party system.

 

Q: Did you vote to get rid of them?

A: I introduced an actual ordinance to cut off city funding for third-party ALPR systems. At the same meeting, I abstained from a voice resolution to "take the cameras down for good." A resolution is a statement. My ordinance is the thing that actually binds city spending, and I would rather pass a real solution than a performative one.

 

Q: Does your plan ban police from using license plate readers?

A: No. It bans taxpayer spending on third-party ALPR subscriptions — sales tax money, grants, and asset forfeitures. It protects routine police equipment like body cameras, dashcams, facility cameras, and traffic signal systems, honors existing contracts until they expire, and preserves cost-free investigative leads from other agencies.

 

Q: Does this make Cabot less safe?

A: That is the wrong question. The question is whether we keep paying an out-of-state vendor forever, or control the tool ourselves. My plan does not build a city system — it ends the third-party one first. Any future system would be a separate, later public decision, under public oversight, with strict terms like no data retention. I am not promising a system gets built tomorrow.

 

Q: What about stolen cars, Amber Alerts, and serious crime?

A: Existing contracts are honored until they expire, and cost-free investigative leads from other agencies are preserved. Nothing in this plan touches routine police equipment. The point is who controls the system and who can audit it, not whether police can do their jobs.

 

Q: What stops another wrongful stop?

A: Three required steps before any stop: visual plate verification, hotlist confirmation through dispatch and state and federal databases, and occupant identification. No stop on a camera read alone.

 

Q: Who can see my travel data, and for how long?

A: Under my plan, non-evidentiary scans are purged after 30 days, with certificates proving the purge. The lateral data-sharing pools end — no more sending Cabot residents' travel data to unmonitored national databases, except through a bilateral compact or an exigent, case-by-case transfer. The system gets annual independent security audits and penetration testing.

 

Q: What else is banned?

A: Facial recognition, audio recording, predictive policing, and wireless device tracking like Bluetooth or Wi-Fi MAC harvesting. A license plate reader should read plates — nothing more.

 

Q: How will voters know it's working?

A: Monthly statistics in the council agenda packet and a public report every six months: total plates scanned, alert hits by category, verified hits versus false positives, and external searches. If the numbers look bad, you will see it.

 

Q: Why not just keep Flock?

A: Because it is a permanent drain on taxpayer dollars to a vendor we do not control, for data practices we cannot audit. Local control, fiscal responsibility, and privacy are not in conflict here — they are the same position.

 

Q: What happens next?

A: Step one: decide whether to keep the current system. On the anti-Flock side, the answer is no, and I believe enough of the pro-camera side also agrees this should not be done by a third party. If that is true, we have a consensus, and we can undo the current system. Step two comes later, separately: voters decide in the open whether Cabot wants its own system, under public oversight, with strict terms like no data retention.